This question led to a new feature in a package:

The etoolbox package provides various tools that "are useful to hook into or modify existing code" (etoolbox manual, section 3.4). The most important one is the \patchcmd command with the syntax


which "extracts the replacement text of a <command>, replaces [the first occurence of] <search> with <replace>, and reassembles the <command>". Other useful macros are, e.g., \apptocmd and \pretocmd which will append resp. prepend code to the replacement text of a command.

The biblatex package features the commands \newbibmacro, \renewbibmacro, and \providebibmacro (plus their starred counterparts). These commands resemble \newcommand/\renewcommand/\providecommand "except that [the command name] may contain characters such as numbers and punctuation marks and does not start with a backslash" (biblatex manual, section 4.6.4). The "bibmacros" defined this way may be executed via \usebibmacro{<command name>}.

Is it possible to define a \patchbibmacro command that extracts and modifies the replacement text of macros created with \newbibmacro the same way \patchcmd does for macros created with \newcommand?

1 Answer 1

  \expandafter#1\csname abx@macro@\detokenize{#2}\endcsname}

Now you have available

\patchbibmacro \pretobibmacro \apptobibmacro \showbibmacro


\newbibmacro{foo}[1]{-#1-} actually executes

\expandafter\newcommand\csname abx@macro@\detokenize{foo}\endcsname[1]{-#1-}

(I omit some gory details, but this is almost the truth).

This, of course, won't work for macros with optional arguments, but here's how:

  \expandafter#1\csname\expandafter\string\csname abx@macro@\detokenize{#2}\endcsname\endcsname}

With \patchbibmacroopt you can define biblatex macros defined for instance by


One has to remember that with \newcommand{\baz}[2][x]{-#1-#2-} the macro doing the real work is


that, of course, has to be accessed with


Easier solution

The question led to adding some features to the xpatch package, which now has


which work out of the box even with bibmacros defined having an optional argument; the syntax is the same as the one for \patchcmd, \pretocmd and \apptocmd:

\xpretobibmacro{<name>}{<code to prepend>}{<success>}{<failure>}
\xapptobibmacro{<name>}{<code to append>}{<success>}{<failure>}

So, if foo has been defined with \newbibmacro{foo}[1]{-#1-} one can say, for instance,


to change the first - into +.

  • Is there any case where using the opt variants is inadvisable? If not, why not use just these variants (and rename them)?
    – lockstep
    Jan 10, 2012 at 22:46
  • For macros defined without optional arguments (\newbibmacro{foo}[1]{...}), you mustn't use the "opt" variant. It would be possible to catch this automatically, but it's complicated and I don't think it's worth a try. However, you can look for xpatchcmd on the site for an automatic solution that could be ported to this case.
    – egreg
    Jan 10, 2012 at 22:51
  • Indeed - I just noticed that my "one size fits all" idea won't work.
    – lockstep
    Jan 10, 2012 at 22:55
  • Look here: tex.stackexchange.com/a/24377/4427 :)
    – egreg
    Jan 10, 2012 at 23:27
  • 2
    @lockstep I've just uploaded the xpatch package that incorporates code for this kind of patching.
    – egreg
    Jan 12, 2012 at 21:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .